CC Min 1994-03-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

The letters to Special Counsel Jackson from Councilwoman Steinfeld dated March 23 (two letters) and March 22 are part ofthis official record and are in the City Clerk Department's files. Vice Mayor Claire, member of the Council Personnel Subcommittee, summarized the issues involved and explained that the Subcommittee's first report completely exonerated both Council Members Steinfeld and Sanfilipo. Vice Mayor Claire explained that once the investigation began the Personnel Subcommittee asked all members of the Council not to discuss the events under investigation either through comments or written material; Councilman Sanfilipo abided by this request of the Subcommittee but Councilwoman Steinfeld did not. In fact, Councilwoman Steinfeld's behavior was deemed to be totally inappropriate, including personal attacks on the City Attorney and the Vice Mayor, attempts to impugn the integrity of witnesses, attempts to pressure or compel witnesses not to comply with the subpoena from the Council, and attempts to impede the investigation. Vice Mayor Claire made it clear that since the first report of the Subcommittee completely exonerated Councilwoman Steinfeld from any wrong doing under investigation, it was totally unnecessary to discuss any part of the first report. Vice Mayor Claire stated that the issue under consideration was only the behavior of Councilwoman Steinfeld after the investigation had begun. Councilman Greenalch, member of the Council Personnel Subcommittee, stated that the intent of this meeting was not to discuss a disciplinary action, and in fact, no disciplinary action would be taken against Councilwoman Steinfeld of any kind. Vice Mayor Claire concurred. Vice Mayor Claire described certain tapes requested by Councilwoman Steinfeld and three letters Councilwoman Steinfeld sent to Special Counsel James Jackson, one dated March 22, 1994, and two dated March 23, 1994, and directed questions to Councilwoman Steinfeld regarding those materials. 2) Response to charges In response to Vice Mayor Claire's questions, Councilwoman Steinfeld referred all questions to her attorney, Timothy J. Morgan, Attorney At Law in Santa Cruz, California, 905 Cedar Street, who advised the Council that it would be difficult for him to advise his client how to respond to questions, due to the fact he was hired the day before and was unfamiliar with the file. Mr. Morgan advised the Council that he had instructed his client not to answer any questions at this time. Mr. Morgan stated in reviewing the agenda, the proceedings were scripted as a trial and he had grave concerns about his clients rights. Mr. Morgan stated that Mr. Jackson had assured him that no disciplinary actions would be taken against his client, but he was concerned that his clients rights would be trammeled in this format, and he formally asked for a continuance of this matter to a later time to allow him to be familiar with the file and advise his client what steps should be taken. Mr. Morgan stated he had advised Councilwoman Steinfeld she could only make a meaningful response once she had received his advice and he could not give that now without knowing the file. In response to Vice Mayor Claire's questions regarding why Councilwoman Steinfeld wanted certain information in her letter to Great Western Bank of January 24, 1994 (which related to the first report), Mr. Morgan repeated he could not respond at this time due to his lack of knowledge regarding the file, and he had advised his client not to respond at this time. In reference to the March 23 letter's demands, Mr. Morgan advised that they were part of the rights of due process that would attach to a proceeding in the nature of a censure. If the proceeding relates to censure Regular Meeting Minutes MINUTE BOOK NO. 52 March 28, 1994 Page ~o. 192 Page 8